Does anyone know who compliled the Holy Bible? Why did they choose those particular books and not others?

Answer 1

The Old Testament is a record of creation and the Israelites.These books were written and preserved throught the centuries,and were regarded as God-inspired.These books were considered authoratative.In the time of Jesus,eyewitnesses recorded the events.The later books were also regarded as inspired.These were regarded as accurate and reliable,for three reasons:
Apostolic authorship
Conformity to the faith
Widespread usage and acceptance
The so-called 'lost books' were written centuries after Jesus,by Gnostics pretenders.The early church did not consider these books inspired,and they were never 'on the shortlist',as it were.By the way-the Council of Nicea did not throw out books they disagreed with,as they were never considered canon in the first place.Just thought I'd clear that up.

Answer 2

Question: "How and when was the canon of the Bible put together?"
Answer: The term "canon" is used to describe the books that are divinely inspired and therefore belong in the Bible. The difficult aspect of determining the Biblical canon is that the Bible does not give us a list of the books that belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process, first by Jewish rabbis and scholars, and then later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the Biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.
Compared to the New Testament, there was very little controversy over the canon of the Old Testament. Hebrew believers recognized God’s messengers, and accepted their writings as inspired of God. There was undeniably some debate in regards to the Old Testament canon. However, by 250 A.D. there was nearly universal agreement on the canon of Hebrew Scripture. The only issue that remained was the Apocrypha…with some debate and discussion continuing today. The vast majority of Hebrew scholars considered the Apocrypha to be good historical and religious documents, but not on the same level as the Hebrew Scriptures.
For the New Testament, the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized. Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27). Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115). Polycarp, a disciple of John the Apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235). The New Testament books receiving the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John. The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in (A.D. 170). The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John. In A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.
The councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Is the book being accepted by the Body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit? Again, it is crucial to remember that the church did not determine the canon. No early church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God convincing His followers of what He had already decided upon. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Answer 3

Many modern Protestants point to four "Criteria for Canonicity" to justify the books that have been included in the Old and New Testament, which are judged to have satisfied the following:

1. Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their close companions).
2. Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the end of the fourth century).
3. Liturgical Use — read publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord's Supper (their weekly worship services).
4. Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar or complementary to other accepted Christian writings.

The basic factor for recognizing a book's canonicity for the New Testament was divine inspiration, and the chief test for this was apostolicity. The term apostolic as used for the test of canonicity does not necessarily mean apostolic authorship or derivation, but rather apostolic authority. Apostolic authority is never detached from the authority of the Lord.

Eusebius, around the year 300, recorded a New Testament canon:
"1... First then must be put the holy quaternion of the Gospels; following them the Acts of the Apostles... the epistles of Paul... the epistle of John... the epistle of Peter... After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse of John, concerning which we shall give the different opinions at the proper time. These then belong among the accepted writings."

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf2-01-08.htm#P1497_696002

Answer 4

Because most of the other books were not all that great. A lot of the New Testament era rejects were essentially adventure stories in which Jesus, Peter or Paul performed miracles to get out of fixes. (Young Jesus strikes a playmate dead, then resurrects him when the parents complain. He makes pigeons out of clay, blows on them and they fly away. He throws all of a dyer's fabrics in one vat, then pulls them out in different colors, etc.) They were basically pandering to a pious Christian's desire for more stories without contributing any moral lessons or theological insights.

Others, like the Shepherd of Heremas, were very symbolic and mysterious but didn't express a clear idea. (Revelation almost didn't make it in.) Or they expressed a theology that was very unorthodox. The Gnostic gospels of Thomas and of Mary Magdalen described the God of the Hebrews as a corrupted demi-god who had created an inferior, decaying world of matter, from which the truly divine Jesus was teaching us how to preserve ourselves through levels of spiritual cleansing. The theology wasn't compatible with a doctrine of love, compassion and humble service.

Some books were rejected simply because the authorship was unclear (The Letter to the Hebrews was not on everyone's list.). And a few otherwise uplifting books, like the Letters of Clement and Barnabas, didn't say anything that Paul or Peter hadn't already said. Various church leaders wrote up lists of books and letters they felt were inspirational, but the final agreement was not reached until the Church councils of the Fourth Century.

There were similar books among the Hebrew scriptures. The Book of Jubilees, The Secrets of Enoch, the Apotheosis of Moses and such included pious elaborations of other Bible stories, or overwrought detailed descriptions of the workings of the Earth and planets and useless insider "information" about heaven. These were never considered because they were more trivia than wisdom. The Torah, the first five books were regarded as most inspired, followed by the Prophets (from Joshua to Malachi). Finally, the miscellaneous Writings, like the Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, Ruth and Daniel were included by the Jewish scholars. It was felt that any books written after the time of Ezra should not be considered inspired (although they had no way of determining this outside of what the books themselves claimed). But it wasn't until about 90 CE that the rabbis came up with an official list. They rejected a few books that were found in the Septuagint, the first Greek translation of their Bible, but not in Hebrew. These would eventually become known as the "Apocrypha", although Christians accepted all the books of the Septuagint up till the time of Martin Luther.

Answer 5

Thank you for asking a great question. So very nice. This is going to take a bit of time as I will approach this as you know nothing and for that I apologize; but I know not where else to begin.

As the new faith spilled out of the Jewish lands into gentile country, the Church grew at an amazing rate. Yet Jesus had written nothing, nor did His Apostles or disciples. Their Lord's command was to preach and that is what they did. But others stepped in to fill the void and soon books about Jesus were everywhere. Some were sincere, some self-serving. Some were inspiring and some were ridiculous. As the persecutions heated up and the Apostles and those close to them were aging, the Church leaders wanted them to commit the true story of Jesus to writing so that it would not be lost to the writings of the many cults that had attached their name to Jesus. We see this fact in the opening words of Luke's gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us. Just as they were handed down to us were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. (Luke 1:1-4)


But even after Apostles or apostolic men started writing, the main emphasis was still on the spoken Tradition, the living voice.

By the dawn of the fourth century most everybody in the Church accepted that the four gospels, 13 epistles of St. Paul and the Acts of the Apostles were inspired Scripture. Still the three epistles of John, first and second Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, Jude, James and the Revelation were in doubt. Also, there were books that are not in our New Testament that large segments of the Church considered to be inspired, books like The Shepherd of Hermes, Epistle of Barnabas, the Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles, Apostolic Constitutions, the Gospel according to the Hebrews, St. Paul’s Epistle to the Logicians, and the Epistle of St. Clement, only to name a few.

Like most momentous decisions in the early Church, it was the trial of persecution that moved the Church to define the canon of the New Testament. In the year A.D. 303 the Roman emperor Diocletian issued an edict that all Christian Churches should be destroyed and that all Christian Scripture was to be burned under pain of death. The problem was that no one was really sure what was Scripture and what was not. What books were you bound to die for and what books could freely be given up to be burned? And if a person had surrendered the Acts of Paul and Thecla to the flames, was he an apostate? These were not mere academic debates, but real life and death questions.

In the year 397 A.D., at the urging of St. Augustine the Council of Carthage was convened to establish once and for all the Canon of the New Testament. The bishops of the Church gathered to a daunting task. There were over 250 books all claiming inspiration or Apostolic authority! How were they to proceed? What criteria were they to use to establish which books were inspired and which were not? It can be summed up in one word, Tradition. (To explain this Tradition, this is the body of oral teaching that was handed down to us from the hands of Christ through the hands of His apostles. It is binding and cannot be changed, because it is the word of God.)

Through the guidance of the Holy Spirit the council fathers asked themselves how the Church had historically viewed each book in question and how its teachings stacked up against Apostolic Tradition.

Two incredible decisions came out of the Council of Carthage: the council fathers had defined the canon of the New Testament and they had decreed that the canon of Scripture was closed. "What arrogance!" we may cry today. "How can the Church tell us what books we are and are not to consider Scripture, and then say that no book can be added, EVER!" But that is exactly what happened and it shaped forever the course and tone of Christian history.

TheNew Testament was gathered, confirmed and closed by Catholic bishops at a Catholic council. These Catholic bishops, the ones on whose authority the canon of the New Testament was established also taught the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, veneration of Mary the Mother of God, prayer to the saints, the necessity of good works in salvation and purgatory. They were fully and wholly Catholic.

Answer 6

Here is the answer to your question.

The Canon of Scripture
120
It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.90 This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.91

The Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.

The New Testament: the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Acts of the Apostles, the Letters of St. Paul to the Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letters of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude, and Revelation (the Apocalypse).
The Old Testament


121
The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value,92 for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.


122
Indeed, "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,"94 the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way."95


123
Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. The Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism).
The New Testament


124
"The Word of God, which is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, is set forth and displays its power in a most wonderful way in the writings of the New Testament"96 which hand on the ultimate truth of God's Revelation. Their central object is Jesus Christ, God's incarnate Son: his acts, teachings, Passion and glorification, and his Church's beginnings under the Spirit's guidance.97


125
The Gospels are the heart of all the Scriptures "because they are our principal source for the life and teaching of the Incarnate Word, our Savior."98

Peace and every blessing!

Answer 7

The Christian version was compiled by the Council of Nicea, which was conviened by order of Constantine. The various churches were tasked to come up with one unified believe system. Some items that the major could agree upon made it in, others did not. This included books that didn't agree with the believes that where established.

The Jewish version was compiled a little earlier on and involved similar arguing over this and item, with books being rejected or included based on vote. The Christain version bares little resemblence to the Jewish version because they didn't have anything to do with each other in their own processes.

Answer 8

The present day King James version of the bible was composed by priests about the year 400 AD. There were many earlier bibles written in languages that were difficult to understand. They put themselves in charge of re-writing the Christian rule book. And eliminated gospels that they felt didn't serve their purpose. There were actually hundreds of disciples but they chose only 12 for what reason we will never know.

Answer 9

The Hebrew bible has come down to us through the scrupulous care of ancient scribes who copied the original text in successive generations. By the 6th century AD the Hebrew sect of the Masorets preseved the scriptures for 500 yrs in what is known as the Masoretic Text. Bomberg printed the first Rabbinic bible in 1516. The ben Chayyin text followed in subsequent years. The King James version follows closely these texts and also the Septuagent (Greek) and Ladin Vulgate of the Old Testament versions of the Hebrew Scriptures. It also draws on relevant Dead Sea cave manuscripts preserved by the Essenes, who were in the line of Zadok, King David’s priests/scribes. The New Testament text is supported more than any other ancient or modern text by a voluminous body of ancient literature: over 5 thousand Greek, 8 thousand Latin,
and many more manuscripts attest to the integrity of the New Testament. (Paraphrased from the forward of NKJ Word for Today Bible, c 1982, Thomas Nelson publishers)
As for how the books of the Bible were chosen, it is important to know what the Bible is all about: God’s plan of redemption for fallen mankind. God ordained this plan before He made the foundation of the world. “Wherefore when He (Jesus/Yeshua) cometh into the world, He saith Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not but a body has thou prepared for me” (Hebr. 10:5). “Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will O God (Hebr. 10:7). “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). It’s about the Messiah, the Lord Jesus. About how the Nation of Israel brought us the Lord “Salvation (Jesus) is from the Jews.” And salvation is “for the Jew first” (Rom. 1:16); and “God has not cast away his people (Israel)
which He foreknew” (Rom. 11:2).
If you ever wonder why there’s so much strife in the Middle East: it’s not about oil. It’s about Satan blinding the minds of people (radical Islamics—whom the Lord loves, and whom He
offers forgiveness and regeneration to) who want to wipe Israel off the map. Not a good plan.

Answer 10

There was a group of people who put them together, likeley the catholic church, the books that made it were called "The Bible Cannon".

The books were picked based on what sounded good.

The books left out can be bought at the local bookstore.
Look up "The Other Bible" it has all the book left out.